Thread: [GENERAL] Fields re-ordered on JOIN with * and USING
Hi. I recently noticed that when doing a SELECT * with USING, that the join field(s) appear first in the output. I'd never noticed that before, and was just curious if that is expected behavior or not. Thanks.
Ken
CREATE TEMP TABLE t1 (
f1 INTEGER,
f2 INTEGER UNIQUE,
f3 INTEGER,
f4 INTEGER
);
CREATE TEMP TABLE t2 (
f2 INTEGER,
f3 INTEGER,
f5 INTEGER
);
SELECT * FROM t1 LEFT JOIN t2 USING (f3,f2);
f3 | f2 | f1 | f4 | f5
----+----+----+----+----
(0 rows)
--

AGENCY Software
A Free Software data system
By and for non-profits
(253) 245-3801
learn more about AGENCY or
follow the discussion.
Hi. I recently noticed that when doing a SELECT * with USING, that the join field(s) appear first in the output. I'd never noticed that before, and was just curious if that is expected behavior or not. Thanks.
I don't recall if or where it is documented but it is intentional., as is the documented fact that only one instance of the named column appears in the output.
David J.
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Ken Tanzer <ken.tanzer@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi. I recently noticed that when doing a SELECT * with USING, that the >> join field(s) appear first in the output. I'd never noticed that before, >> and was just curious if that is expected behavior or not. Thanks. > I don't recall if or where it is documented but it is intentional., as is > the documented fact that only one instance of the named column appears in > the output. Yes, it's documented, here: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/queries-table-expressions.html#QUERIES-FROM under "7.2.1.1. Joined Tables": Furthermore, the output of JOIN USING suppresses redundant columns: there is no need to print both of the matched columns, since they must have equal values. While JOIN ON produces all columns from T1 followed by all columns from T2, JOIN USING produces one output column for each of the listed column pairs (in the listed order), followed by any remaining columns from T1, followed by any remaining columns from T2. regards, tom lane
... btw, a little digging shows that this ordering is required by the SQL standard. The least excruciating version of the relevant text is in SQL92 7.5 <joined table>: d) Let SLCC be a <select list> of <derived column>s of the form COALESCE ( TA.C, TB.C ) AS C for every column C that is a corresponding join column, taken in order of their ordinal positions in T1. e) Let SL1 be a <select list> of those <column name>s of T1 that are not corresponding join columns, taken in order of their ordinal positions in T1, and let SLT2 be a <select list> of those <column name>s of T2 that are not correspond- ing join columns, taken in order of their ordinal positions in T2. f) The descriptors of the columns of the result of the <joined table> are the same as the descriptors of the columns of the result of SELECT SLCC, SLT1, SLT2 FROM TR1, TR2 Later versions of the standard use many more words to say the same thing. regards, tom lane
...least excruciating version of the relevant text...
Speaking of which, I had looked at the "From" section of the "SELECT" page (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-select.html#SQL-FROM), which also has a somewhat detailed section on joins. I'm wondering about the utility of:
- Adding a link from the "SELECT" page (FROM section) to the page Tom referenced (which includes a link the other way)
and/or
- Adding this detail to the section on USING on the select page:
A clause of the form USING ( a, b, ... ) is shorthand for ON left_table.a = right_table.a AND left_table.b = right_table.b .... Also, USING implies that only one of each pair of equivalent columns will be included in the join output, not both. Outcome columns specified by USING will appear first in the joined results.
Cheers,
Ken